2016 SCOTUS cases

Puerto Rico v. Sanchez Valle

The case of Puerto Rico v. Sánchez Valle created discussions about whether Puerto Rico was sovereign enough to prosecute criminals after they had already been successfully prosecuted by the federal government (according to the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause both states and the federal government can try a defendant for the same crime). The court ruled no—thereby establishing that the Island is not a separate sovereign. This news article discusses the reasoning behind this decision and how many have challenged it, each opinion is supported by very different judicial philosophies.

This news article discusses the implications of the case of Puerto Rico v. Sánchez Valle for the Island. Ultimately, it makes clear that the Island is not fully autonomous and answers to the U.S. Congress. The author presents Justice Elena Kagan’s explanations for this decision, which she based on the Island’s history and its relationship with the United States, showing that Congress has had the final word on Puerto Rico’s affairs.

The judge’s decision in the case of Puerto Rico v. Sánchez Valle states that, for the purposes of the Double Jeopardy Clause, Puerto Rico’s status as free associated state is not one of sovereignty. Describing dissident voices, the news article presents the opinions of judges Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. This decision was particularly important at that time, since the Island’s bankruptcy laws and fiscal issues were under discussion.

Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust

This news article discusses the Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust case and how it may affect the dynamics of the restructuring of the Island’s debt. If Puerto Rico gains a favorable Supreme Court ruling, it would allow it to dictate terms on at least $20 billion of its debt. This is due to the fact that the case involves the Recovery Act, a local law passed in 2014, that is not part of the federal bankruptcy code. This article explains what the process the Recovery Act entails and it recounts the diverging points of view of Puerto Rico and of the bondholder’s in relation to this Act.

The Supreme Court did not give Puerto Rico a favorable ruling in the Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust case. This means that the Island does not have the power to authorize municipalities to seek debt restructuring. This news article explains what this ruling means, in light of both the Supreme Court decision that Puerto Rico was a territory without sovereignty separate from the U.S. Congress and the passage of the bill that would establish a federal oversight board on the Island. Furthermore, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissenting opinions are discussed (they did not agree that Section 903 should have preempted the Recovery Act ruling).

This news article establishes a connection between the rulings of Puerto Rico v. Sánchez Valle, Puerto Rico v. Franklin California Tax-Free Trust, and the denial of review for Tuaua v. United States. These Supreme Court decisions cement the colonial position of Puerto Rico and American Samoa, ending theories of self-determination in these areas. The author goes through each of the Supreme Court’s decisions, explaining the specifics of the cases and what they mean for each Island.